Weakly Nonhydrostatic Effects in Compositionally‐Driven Gravity Flows
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the study of compositionally‐driven gravity currents it is customary to adopt the hydrostatic assumption for the pressure field which, in turn, leads to a depth‐independent horizontal velocity field and significant simpilifications to the governing equations. The hydrostatic assumption is reasonable in, say, the case of a two‐layer flow when the depth variations of the lower layer are small when considered as a function of space and time. However, for larger deflections of the interface (such as those caused by bottom topography) the flow will deviate in its behavior from the low aspect ratio, slowly varying purely hydrostatic flow because of the presence of vertical accelerations. In this paper we present an approach to capture the contribution of interface curvature to nonhydrostatic effects in fully time‐dependent flows in two‐fluid systems. Our approach involves expanding the relevant dependent variables in the form of an asymptotic expansion f=f(0)+δ2f(1)+o(δ2), where 0 < δ≪ 1 is the aspect ratio of the flow, and obtaining the first‐order correction to hydrostatic theory. Numerical results and comparisions with the purely hydrostatic theory are included.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".